Burkean:”But I do think there is something strange that the Obama camp isn’t talking about. I find it odd that he won’t just reveal an original copy of his birth certificate. I used to think it was because it revealed that his parents were never married, but then their divorce papers surfaced and Obama is quite open about the fact that his mother was pregnant at the time of her marriage and everyone knows Obama Sr. was already married in Africa.”
I have also thought alot about what might be on the original BC that is so sensitive. There really is very little that most anyone would be concerned about. The names, age, race, and residence of the parents are on this document. The place, time, and day of birth is given as well. The signatures of both parents and attending physician are all that is left.
None of this information really matter to most anyone. So the only valid reason to supress this info would seem to be if any of this data is missing. In other words, if there may be reason to believe the information is false or invalid.
I suspect the information on the original vault copy may have inconsistencies that contrast to things that Obama has already legally proclaimed.
As you can see by the 1963 version posted above (Post 51), the place of birth of the parents and their ages at the time of birth are also included. Plus only one parental signature, and that need not be a parent, it could be "other informant".
Maybe Grandma Toot signed there and someone else signed as the witness. (or Stanley Ann signed as parent, and her mother as the witness.) You'll note too that the hospital name is also included, but if not a hospital birth, the street address where born is needed.
Under the circumstances, a "home birth" would be kind of suspicious.